Mumbai Court October 1999 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Shri Anil S/O Damodhar Paunipagar Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-21-1999
Reported in: (2000)102BOMLR500
J.N. Patel, J.1. By this petition of habeas corpus, the petitioner seeks quashing and setting aside of the detention order passed by the respondent Commissioner of Police, Nagpur.2. On 16.4.1999 Shri Ulhas Joshi, the Commissioner of Police, Nagpur City passed an order that the petitioner be detained under the Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Slumlords, Bootleggers, Drug-offenders and Dangerous Persons Act, 1981 (Amendment of 1996) (Mah. LV of 1981) (for short 'M.P.D.A. Act of 1981) in order to prevent him from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order. The detention order came to be passed by the Commissioner of Police in exercise of powers conferred on him under Sub-section (1) of Section 3 of M.P.D.A. Act of 1981 read with Government Order, Home Department (Spl.) No. DOS. 1399/4/SPL-3 (B), dated 3rd February, 1999.3. The Detaining Authority in the grounds of detention dated 16.4.1999 communicated to the petitioner found that the petitioner w...
Late K.L. Deshmukh Shikshan Sanstha Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-21-1999
Reported in: 2000(2)ALLMR221; (2000)102BOMLR912
Y.K. Sabharwal, C.J.1. Rule, returnable forthwith.2. The Petitioner - Educational Society challenges the grant of permission to respondent No. 4 - Shri Shankargiri Maharaj Shikshan Sanstha and Krida Mandal, Karkheda to open a new secondary school at Waroli in terms of the order dated 26th November, 1997 passed by respondent Nos. 1 to 3. By the impugned order dated 26th November, 1997, respondent No. 4 has been granted permission to open a new secondary school from 8th Standard onwards from the academic Session 1997-98 at Waroli. The application filed by the petitioner to open the said school at Waroli has been rejected by respondent Nos. 1 to 3. The petitioner claims that it is entitled to grant of permission to open a new secondary school at Waroli, but its application was not considered by Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 and instead the permission was granted to respondent No. 4 illegally and contrary to the relevant rules. Directions are sought against respondent Nos. 1 to 3 to consider the ...
Sudarshan M. Surekha and Others Vs. M/S. S.M. Samant and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-18-1999
Reported in: 2000(1)ALLMR16; 2000(2)BomCR79; (2000)2BOMLR183
ORDERD.K. Deshmukh, J.1. The names of respondent Nos. 2, 3 and 4 are permitted to be deleted. Rule, returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of parties.2. All these four petitions are filed by members of the same family. The awards have also been made by the same Arbitrators. The questions that arise for determination are also almost identical. Therefore, all these four petitions can be conveniently disposed of by a common order.3. It appears that the claim was referred to the Arbitrators under the bye-laws of the Bombay Stock Exchange by the respondent No. 1 for recovery of some amounts from the petitioners. It transpires that the proceedings started in the year 1987. At that time, the petitioners sought inspection of the documents relied on by the respondent No. 1 in its statement of claim. The inspection of the documents was taken. Thereafter, a request was made for supply of zerox copies of the documents. However, the zerox copies were not supplied. Therefore, a request was m...
Aditya Mills Ltd. and anr. Vs. Cc
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-15-1999
Reported in: (2000)(90)LC221Tri(Mum.)bai
1. These appeals are against the order of the Principal Collector of Customs, Mumbai confiscating under Section 113 I of the Act, seven consignments of polyester blended yarn with an option to redeem on payment of fine, imposing penalty under Section 114 of the Act on the exporter and its managing director.2. The common advocate for the two appellants explains that in his order the Commissioner has found that the yarn was made from waste fibre and not as claimed by the exporter from virgin polyester fibre.He says that the sole evidence relied upon, opinion of the Silk & Art Silk Mills Industries Research Association (SASMIRA) is unreliable. Ms.A. Kaplash, Dy. Director of SASMIRA who was cross-examined with regard to the certificate given, had stated to an-y other exporter that it was not possible to technically distinguish between yarn from virgin fibre and yarn from waste fibre in view of the process to which fibre is subjected during spinning. He next contends that in any event,...
All India Trade Union Congress Vs. Ravi Fisheries Limited and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-15-1999
Reported in: 2000(1)BomCR612; (2000)IILLJ745Bom
ORDERR.M. LODHA, J.1. By this contempt petition, the petitioner viz. All India Trade Union Congress prays that respondent Nos. 1 to 3 be punished for having committed the civil contempt for wilfully disobeying the order of the Division Bench dated May 5, 1998 in Writ Petition No. 124 of 1998 and for direction to respondents to comply with the said order and further directions to respondents to pay to the workers wages listed at annexure 'B' to the writ petition for the months of June, July, August, September and October, 1998. The contempt petition was filed on 6th November, 1998.2. Writ Petition No. 124 of 1998 was at the instance of Suja Abraham and others wherein it was prayed that the respondent Nos. 2 to 7 who were employers be directed to comply with all labour legislations in respect of the workers employed in their establishment. The present petitioner-union was one of the petitioners in the writ petition. The Division Bench disposed of the writ petition on 5-5-98 with the foll...
Shri Ketan Ranjit Maaganlal and Others Vs. Panaji Municipal Council an ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-15-1999
Reported in: 2000(1)ALLMR515; 2000(2)BomCR746; 2000(3)MhLj233
ORDERR.K. Batta, J.1. These appeals arise out of common judgment of the learned Single Judge, which is the subject-matter of challenge in these appeals.2. The brief facts common in alt appeals may be enumerated first;After the construction of the building named 'Ketan Apartments', the Municipality had issued demand notices dated 15th September 1987 levying Municipal house tax for the period January 1984 to March, 1988. The appellants, who are occupants of flats in the said building, being aggrieved by such demand, had filed an appeal before the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Panaji. This appeal was allowed and the respondent No. 1 Panaji Municipal Council (hereinafter referred to as 'the respondent') was directed to refund the amount recovered and to further re-assess the tax, after hearing the appellants. Consequently, the respondent issued notices levying Municipal house tax dated 14th June 1989 to the appellants informing that the assessment relating to imposition of tax had been...
Sunil Kumar Gupta Vs. Commissioner of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-14-1999
Reported in: (2000)LC218Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This stay application was argued by Shri S.K. Gupta, the appellant himself. Shri K.L. Ramteke appeared for the Revenue. On hearing both sides on the application, it appeared that at this stage the main appeal could be disposed of. Both sides agreeing this was done.2. The facts in brief are as follows. The appellant filed a Bill of Entry for used car (Renault saloon model 1992) claiming importability in terms of ITC Public Notice No. 3/97. He produced an invoice in his name indicating purchase of the said car in second-hand condition for a net value paid of 2250 pounds. The Customs did not accept the valuation. The initial valuation was done at Rs. 4,24,669/- which was later reassessed to Rs. 2,99,880/-. On examination of the importability it was found that the engine capacity of the car was 1700 cc and also that the importer was in possession of the car for a short period. The said Public Notice prescribed minimum possession of one year and the engine capacity as less than 1600 cc....
Beico Industries Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs (A)
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-14-1999
Reported in: (2001)(130)ELT591Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The appellants imported "Nomex Aramid Paper" claiming classification under Heading 85.46 which covered Electrical Insulators of any material. The Assistant Commissioner was of the view that a distinction was required to be made between 'insulators' and 'insulating materials'. He observed that for such paper to become insulator, it would first be laminated with the plastic film and then cut to size. He therefore classified the goods under Chapter 39. In dealing with the case law cited before him, he relied upon the CEGAT judgment in the case of Sri Ram Refrigeration Industries Ltd. 1993 (63) E.L.T. 593. The assessees then filed an appeal. The Commissioner (Appeal) traced the history of classification of such goods. He observed that earlier these goods were classified under Heading 85.46 and observed that the Supreme Court judgment in the case of Raja Radio Co. v. CC 1995 (77) E.L.T. 251 (S.C.) caused the change in the classification. On reading the tariff entry, he observed that goo...
Shree Samudri Enterprises Vs. Commr. of C. Ex. and Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-14-1999
Reported in: (1999)(114)ELT961Tri(Mum.)bai
2. The appellant had been granted temporary licence under regulation 8(1) of the Custom House Agent Licensing Regulation. The licence was issued on 3rd April, 1997 and valid for a year. The Asistant Commissioner incharge of the inland container depot wrote to the appellant, in response to its letter dated 3-4-1998 asking for renewal of the licence, pointing out that it had not fulfilled the norms for transacting minimum business prescribed in the public notice No. 9 of 1998 issued on 4th April, 1998 and also asked the appellant whether it wished to avail at a third chance for qualifying the examination under the regulation. The appellant accepted that the volume of work done was less than the minimum prescribed in the public notice but asked for renewal undertaking to fulfil the norms. This was followed by a notice on 25-11-1998 proposing to revoke the licence under Regulation 21(1)(b) on the grounds of failure to comply with the minimum requirement of work. The appellant replied to t...
Santoshkumar S/O Sheelchand JaIn Vs. State of Maharashtra Through the ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-14-1999
Reported in: 2000(1)ALLMR551; 2000(4)BomCR76; 2000(2)MhLj42
ORDERS.D. Gundewar, J.1. Feeling aggrieved by the quantum of compensation awarded by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Nagpur (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal') under the impugned award, the claimant, the father of the deceased child has now come up in this appeal seeking enhancement of compensation and modification of award in question.2. I have heard the learned Counsel for the appellant as well as the learned Counsel representing the respondents and have carefully perused the record.3. The facts giving rise to the filing of the present appeal are that on 11-2-1982 at about 7.15 p.m. claimant's minor son Sitosh, who had a nickname as Raju, aged about 2 years 3 months was going to Milk Centre, which was hardly 100 ft. away from his house along with his three sisters including Sulekha for purchasing milk. All of them crossed Bhandara road and after reaching the said Milk Centre, Sulekha was standing in a queue for purchasing milk, while Raju and her other sister Shivani wer...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »